Who will ultimately be able to reap the greatest benefits from the development of artificial intelligence?
I often think about what our world will look like in a few years and how these changes will impact different regions and social groups.
Recently, I listened to an interview with Dario, where he shared his forecast: the pace of progress in models will remain roughly the same, and in 1-3 years, AI will be able not only to write code but also to perform over 90% of the tasks currently handled by engineers — from communication and design to requirements gathering, debugging, and deployment of systems. He also notes that AI will significantly enhance capabilities in physics and biology — for example, creating thousands of effective medicines within a year. All of this sounds very logical, aligns with current trends, and his previous predictions have all come true. Of course, he has the advantage of experience — if someone has truly built a top-tier model from scratch over many years, let them point out where they might be mistaken.
The most important question in this context is — who and where will be able to maximize benefits from these technologies?
Clearly: the main advantage will go to founders and early investors of leading research laboratories — but this is a very narrow group of people. It’s also obvious that most activity is concentrated in Silicon Valley — the San Francisco area where major research centers are located. Slightly less obvious: the United States and China — countries with the overwhelming majority of energy production capacities, server farms, chips, and developed AI models.
Before drawing conclusions, it’s important to understand exactly what this benefit consists of:
First — the dissemination of technologies across the entire economy stimulates productivity growth and GDP. For example: GDP in the San Francisco business district could have tripled in a short period, while a similar indicator for some African country would remain virtually unchanged.
Second — increased efficiency in public administration, healthcare, and education sectors. A good management system, a healthy population, and accessible education create conditions for economic development and improved living standards.
Third — scientific progress. Last year, there was still a small group of people who needed to be convinced of the inevitability of breakthroughs in creating new knowledge thanks to AI. But now the question arises: who actually owns the results of this work?
Fourth — defense. Intelligent coordination systems for combat operations, autonomous weapons, or even biological weapons could lead to significant shifts in the global balance of power — far less stable compared to the current nuclear deterrence system.
When it comes to countries, we can distinguish categories based on the level of benefits:
In democratic countries, technologies will be accessible to most of the population; authoritarian regimes are more likely to concentrate the effect within their borders — for example, on surveillance or citizen control systems.
The effect will be more noticeable in developed economies: AI will replace jobs in the service sector — lawyers, bankers, or programmers — while sectors like agriculture or heavy industry will remain relatively less affected. These countries have more resources to prevent serious economic shocks from technological adoption.
Although, in theory, socialist systems could be more adaptable to such changes, in practice, Europe often moves along populist or pseudo-socialist paths: many countries lack their own resources for manufacturing modern chips or modeling laboratories, making the prospect of using AI for the common good doubtful.
Regarding the practical situation: I am confident that the leaders in benefiting from these advancements will be the United States and China; among those at risk of falling behind are developing countries and post-Soviet states (CIS).
The problems faced by these regions include:
— ongoing endless conflicts or wars (e.g., shelling of Kharkiv over several years), instead of focusing on development;
— their economies are in extremely poor condition — it’s unlikely that anything will change radically within two years;
— lack of modern microchip manufacturing technologies or AI modeling labs (the idea of a gigachad is amusing but useless without infrastructure);
— any achievements will be used solely to strengthen political control rather than address urgent issues like healthcare or education.
As for Europe, it raises a special question: are there chances to become stronger through AI implementation — but this requires investing trillions of euros today into developing technologies, starting to purchase equipment from China, or massively building data centers (hundreds of gigawatt-hours of energy). Countries like Israel, Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, or the UAE can also benefit due to their relatively small populations and highly developed infrastructure.
So, the future depends on how much money governments are willing to invest today in these technologies and how quickly they can mobilize to compete on the global stage.
Created with n8n:
https://cutt.ly/n8n
Created with syllaby:
https://cutt.ly/syllaby